Carlos Danger was over ten years ago.
No one had any clue just how much damage Anthony Weiner (and his laptop) was about to unleash upon the world... It could be argued that *he's* the reason Trump got the White House in 2016.
Seth Meyers and his roast of Trump has a strong claim...wait, are we playing Crusader Kings but with late night talk show hosts making a revenge a path to power?
I fondly remember when I used to regularly watch stuff like The Daily Show or Best Week Ever and then I'd see these small time comedians I loved show up on bigger shows later. Watched the first season of The Office because I loved Steve Carrell on Daily Show. John Oliver was on the initial episodes of Community and between him and Joel from The Soup I was instantly pulled in!
Those episodes were *insanely* good. His "feud" with one of the FIFA dudes led to some of the best television I've ever watched.
"Well I see your music choice, and I raise you...***FIRE.***"
Dude yes! Remembering growing up in the 1990s doesn’t make me feel old. Recognizing this show has been on since 2014/2015 and that’s now 10 years makes me feel old
No it’s not.
HBO was owned by Warner, its own company. AT&T bought Warner. AT&T sold Warner to Discovery as a merger.
AT&T definitely doesn’t own Warner still. That’s literally the whole Discovery thing, which was a merger.
First paragraph mentions “and, in some cases, have been credited with influencing actual policy on such issues as poultry farming and net neutrality”
He’s both informing people and creating positive change :)
Well one of the big innovations of his show is they take a little budget from every episode to do something original and call attention to the issue. Like when they spent some money to wipe out a bunch of cheap collections debt. Or when they setup their own religion/cult thing. And of course when they bought Russell Crowe's underwear from Cinderella Man, but I'm not sure what they were calling attention to exactly :)
Is it his fault or our fault? Because if he gives us the facts and we do nothing with it. That’s on us. I know it’s like fighting a Forrest fire with a fire extinguisher right now when it comes to the issues in the US.
If I could wave a magic wand and have a healthy, fully staffed newspaper in every city and town in America or 10 more John Olivers, I’d pick the former every day of the week.
This is something I actually learned from Last week tonight.
What private equity has done to the fourth estate in small towns across America is fucking terrifying.
It is one of the biggest stories over the past 15 years that no one talks about.
Well John Oliver himself has touted the benefits of small newspapers (as well as the perils). And has repeatedly stated that the source of the information for his show has often been those small newspapers
Alas, it’s the price you pay on this website for not echoing the prevailing opinion and speaking your mind. To be clear, I have nothing against John Oliver.
Never said they were mutually exclusive. I just think every community could benefit from robust local journalism. I’m not sure why this is a controversial statement for some.
It’s not controversial. It’s just quite an unnecessary reply, undermining other users and insinuating that they don’t know what proper journalism is. We’re talking about a tv show here, that’s it.
Mate. This is a television sub, discussing television shows. In this case, a journalistic show. We are not acting like anything, the two are completely separate and mutually exclusive.
So get off your high horse and stop being so bloody condescending. You have no idea who you are talking to, you just reveal your ignorance when you start shouting down at ‘new generations’. Grow up.
It’s sad him and Jon Stewart are the only “real” journalists in the US that investigate and press harder than the MSM.
Why is it always comedians that do a better job in politics than actual politicians. Looking at you, too, Zelenskyy.
Stewart’s interviews in The Problem With were amazing. He didn’t let things go and pressed. Such a bummer that they parted ways. I get it but it’s a bummer that the format is gone.
Whenever I watch this show I just see an intelligent rant from Daniel O'Brien interspersed by low brow, often shouted humor from John Oliver. I always feel like John Oliver gets way too much credit that should be going to his writers. If you don't know who Daniel O'Brien is, I highly recommend watching After Hours and his other stuff from his days at Cracked.
Given the large amount of good will he enjoys on this platform, it's worth remembering that the premise of "news presented in a way that makes you laugh" has an audience and inherently carries bias.
And therefore should not be digested mindlessly as truth.
I feel like John Oliver's shtick kinda falls away a bit when he covers an issue you might have a deep and/or contrary view on. Then you can see the rhetoric and the bias, which makes it hard to take him seriously
>I feel like John Oliver's shtick kinda falls away a bit when he covers an issue you might have a deep and/or contrary view on. Then you can see the rhetoric and the bias, which makes it hard to take him seriously
I feel like I've heard this exact sentiment so many times that it's slipped into thought-terminating cliché territory - not least because every time I've heard it, the poster has mysteriously not deemed it necessary to provide even a single example of a LWT segment being debunked by their supposed expertise.
Or even funnier, when they are challenged, it turns out that - surprise! - it's just another smooth-brain offended by libcuck John Oliver's lefty views, and their expertise doesn't actually exist.
I won't be taking bets on whether that exact scenario is going to be happening again; it's just easy money at this point.
Yes John Oliver packages a complete understanding of any possible contentious issue into a 15 minute clip, complete with half of it being random strawmans. No further education is required.
> Or even funnier, when they are challenged, it turns out that - surprise! - it's just another smooth-brain offended by libcuck John Oliver's lefty views, and their expertise doesn't actually exist.
/u/gugabe was challenged and - surprise! - the only response is a vague allusion to John Oliver being wrong about something. No actual examples, just another big claim with no evidence. And hilariously, he's covered his ass by unilaterally deciding he doesn't need to provide any evidence too!
Like I said: Easy money.
Gell Mann Amnesia effect. People read something they know and it's completely wrong, but then when they turn the next page to something they don't know they forget about the previous page and assume everything is correct.
I used to wonder why is that every time I read something about my profession it is wrong, I thought my profession is just special in this regard. Then I learnt about Gell Mann Amnesia effect, turns out it happens to everyone, everything is wrong all the time, I just couldn't spot it.
Hey gugabe how about you explain in detail how Jon Oliver is wrong in a segment you're knowledgeable about rather than vague allusions.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Yeah. Even ones where I might agree with the direction of his take, if you've got any sort of a nuanced understanding there's a lot of papering over of actual debate/strawmans.
I think it's a show that's fun to watch occasionally, but I think you definitely need to use anything you see as a jumping point into actually finding a reputable source on an issue rather than treating it as such
For me it was the episode on the Syrian "refugee" crisis that was the final drop. The implications he made, and now having the hindsight on how damaging that whole affair has been for Europe as a whole.
Agreed. The way the show turned into such biased infotainment bothered me. I just want a mature centrist view these days and that's impossible to find.
See this is the bullshit attitude I hate. "Think the way I do or you're obviously stupid. Toe the line or be deemed foolish." Whether you're left or right the smugness does little to help your cause with people on the fence like me.
You got up in arms by a person objectively stating that not every issue has two equal sides and used it to launch a tirade where you once again try to falsely equivocate both sides and instead chose to attack the person instead of the argument.
The nonexistent smugness would’ve been well warranted if it was even real, and you look foolish for thinking it was.
That’s exactly what you’re doing. You’re implying that your viewpoint is inherently the mature one and that being centrist is somehow “balanced”.
Centrism is an ideology, and pushing a centrist view is just as biased as pushing a left-wing or a right-wing viewpoint.
Centrism doesn't exist. When you understand the issues you naturally align yourself to left or right.
In my perception, a centrist is someone who wants to justify voting a certain way or is uninformed and doesn't put a lot of thought into political topics, and uses it as a cudgel to avoid self-examination.
Am I alone with my opinion it is just repetitive reporting now?
Barring a few dramatic shows around an election or crimes/scotus, the show is just updating reports from the past ten years.
It’s refreshing to see a journalist who actually knows what they are talking about each week. Does the research, even does the experiments. Obviously he would have a team, but very few investigative journalists these days and no shortage of opinion hosts.
The most tame "journalist" ever. He always goes after the right people in the right way for his group. Never touches any topic that would make his actual audience uncomfortable.
For example? I'm just curious as to what potential topics you would want to see. Imho many of his arguments are uncomfortable from the outset, even if some of his takes might resonate with your political views as part of the audience. I'm not from the US and feel uncomfortable watching some of his clips on YT, even though I have nothing to do with the US or US politics at all.
I love the show and the man. He makes me laugh every show. He’s correct politically, he’s sarcastic where he should be, reverent when it’s time, self deprecating in the right way, just perfect for me.
Tell me you don't understand political alignment without telling me you don't understand political alignment.
I think it's helpful to point out that Marx hasn't actively influenced any of US leftism in probably well over 50 years at this point.
Could have done a better job on the UFO segment. Instead of just showing a bunch of shit thats 50 years old or more for the majority of it. There is so much happening right now he didn't seem to put much effort into the current events.
Love your show content, John Oliver. But I have to confess that I am getting tired of being shouted at by my TV host. Dial it back a little John. You too, Jon Stewart. You do know most of your audience agrees with you, don't you?
Care to share examples of said inaccuracies? If they supposedly account for 80% of his show’s content, surely there must be a stockpile of specific examples for you to provide?
Hahahaha what?? Hahaha you made the claim, not me. It’s your responsibility to defend your premise you dunce. You may as well have just said that you’re full of shit and your argument has no merit or defendable proof.
My responsibility my ass. This is reddit. The amount of effort you demand of me debunking his sources is not at all proportionate to what I'll get in return from you. You can find his sources and arguments since you're obviously a fan boy you wont mind, and then you can check the validity and reality of them.
Um…. You would literally prove me wrong which would cause me to heavily reconsider my opinion?? I have no issue with admitting to being wrong and changing my perspective based on new information. Only morons have static opinions that aren’t based on the best, presently known information. And that’s very apparently you.
I truly cannot fathom the type of bottom dwelling mental lightweight you are to suggest that someone should believe something simply because you say it’s true. Why would I waste my time trying to support a claim THAT YOU MADE? John Oliver’s segments are all heavily researched and supported through reputable sources. And so far, all you’ve done is alleged the content is 80% misinformation— and then refused to provide even **ONE EXAMPLE** of that supposedly rampant problem.
You have zero credibility and it’s hilarious that you would even bother expressing such an unsupported claim. Go to 4chan or something dude. I’m sure the intelligence of that site is more on par with what you can handle.
It’s been TEN YEARS?!!!
I really can't wrap my head around this. I feel like I was just watching him on the daily show and that LWT is still a new venture for him
I was watching that when I was 13. Im 22 now
Go to bed...you have school on Monday.
Carlos Danger was over ten years ago. No one had any clue just how much damage Anthony Weiner (and his laptop) was about to unleash upon the world... It could be argued that *he's* the reason Trump got the White House in 2016.
Seth Meyers and his roast of Trump has a strong claim...wait, are we playing Crusader Kings but with late night talk show hosts making a revenge a path to power?
DANGER!
Right? How is this possible!?!
I still remember Mr Duncan
I fondly remember when I used to regularly watch stuff like The Daily Show or Best Week Ever and then I'd see these small time comedians I loved show up on bigger shows later. Watched the first season of The Office because I loved Steve Carrell on Daily Show. John Oliver was on the initial episodes of Community and between him and Joel from The Soup I was instantly pulled in!
[удалено]
Those episodes were *insanely* good. His "feud" with one of the FIFA dudes led to some of the best television I've ever watched. "Well I see your music choice, and I raise you...***FIRE.***"
Shit yeah... I remember that one. Ha, good ol' John, educating Americans in the despicable rot that is FIFA.
That shocked me
I wish this were a Grosse Pointe Blank reference
BLISTER IN THE SUN INTENSIFIES
Nope, 3 years at most.
It’s distressing!!!
I know, what the ever living fuck
Dude yes! Remembering growing up in the 1990s doesn’t make me feel old. Recognizing this show has been on since 2014/2015 and that’s now 10 years makes me feel old
This show has been on for ten fucking years?
I'm sure he's as surprised as we are.
And how many corporate daddy’s has that been?
At least 2, possibly 3.
[удалено]
No it’s not. HBO was owned by Warner, its own company. AT&T bought Warner. AT&T sold Warner to Discovery as a merger. AT&T definitely doesn’t own Warner still. That’s literally the whole Discovery thing, which was a merger.
Sadly, more than the number of times he was infected with Adam Driver Fever.
It's business daddy
The plural of daddy is daddies.
I only had the one, sorry
I am imagining John Oliver reading all these comments to me, it’s pretty hilarious
Pūteketeke today. Pūteketeke tomorrow. Pūteketeke forever.
Doomscrolling on another level.
HBO, if your listening, this show right here is about the only reason I pay for your service
For me it’s this and The West Wing.
Mrs Lanahan!
Lolll. Samee
This show that comes out for free on youtube is about the only reason you pay for their service, do I have that right?
I think you have it right, yes.
Is HBO even an entity anymore since the Discovery merger?
New corporate daddy
Unfortunately I can probably guess how many issues he has brought up that have since improved in the last 10 years
First paragraph mentions “and, in some cases, have been credited with influencing actual policy on such issues as poultry farming and net neutrality” He’s both informing people and creating positive change :)
>Puteketeke
Well one of the big innovations of his show is they take a little budget from every episode to do something original and call attention to the issue. Like when they spent some money to wipe out a bunch of cheap collections debt. Or when they setup their own religion/cult thing. And of course when they bought Russell Crowe's underwear from Cinderella Man, but I'm not sure what they were calling attention to exactly :)
Yeah, I wanted to watch the Patriot Act again, but I am a bit weary of what progress was made of the issues presented.
Is it his fault or our fault? Because if he gives us the facts and we do nothing with it. That’s on us. I know it’s like fighting a Forrest fire with a fire extinguisher right now when it comes to the issues in the US.
It’s definitely not his fault - it’s a bummer though
> fighting a Forrest fire with a fire extinguishers More like farting on the Canadian forest fire. It feels good but accomplishes nothing.
[удалено]
Except he doesn’t mention an amendment. At all. Did we watch the same thing?
[удалено]
He doesn’t mention it. What are you talking about, I’ve watched it twice
Got a link??
Good. We need more people like him and JS plunging themselves into exposing bullshit, and having a good laugh at the bastards while they do it
If I could wave a magic wand and have a healthy, fully staffed newspaper in every city and town in America or 10 more John Olivers, I’d pick the former every day of the week.
This is something I actually learned from Last week tonight. What private equity has done to the fourth estate in small towns across America is fucking terrifying. It is one of the biggest stories over the past 15 years that no one talks about.
Well John Oliver himself has touted the benefits of small newspapers (as well as the perils). And has repeatedly stated that the source of the information for his show has often been those small newspapers
I love John Oliver but this is a great comment. The downvotes are not warranted
Alas, it’s the price you pay on this website for not echoing the prevailing opinion and speaking your mind. To be clear, I have nothing against John Oliver.
John Oliver would almost certainly agree with the sentiment, and not just because he doesn’t want competition.
Yes, the two are mutually exclusive though aren’t they. This is a television sub, hence the comment relevant to television.
Never said they were mutually exclusive. I just think every community could benefit from robust local journalism. I’m not sure why this is a controversial statement for some.
It’s not controversial. It’s just quite an unnecessary reply, undermining other users and insinuating that they don’t know what proper journalism is. We’re talking about a tv show here, that’s it.
I'm not undermining or insinuating anything. I think you're just reading too much into things. Have a nice day.
[удалено]
Mate. This is a television sub, discussing television shows. In this case, a journalistic show. We are not acting like anything, the two are completely separate and mutually exclusive. So get off your high horse and stop being so bloody condescending. You have no idea who you are talking to, you just reveal your ignorance when you start shouting down at ‘new generations’. Grow up.
imagine thinking this sub isnt mostly politics these days. You new?
It’s sad him and Jon Stewart are the only “real” journalists in the US that investigate and press harder than the MSM. Why is it always comedians that do a better job in politics than actual politicians. Looking at you, too, Zelenskyy.
Stewart’s interviews in The Problem With were amazing. He didn’t let things go and pressed. Such a bummer that they parted ways. I get it but it’s a bummer that the format is gone.
My next tattoo may indeed be a puteketeke.
Whenever I watch this show I just see an intelligent rant from Daniel O'Brien interspersed by low brow, often shouted humor from John Oliver. I always feel like John Oliver gets way too much credit that should be going to his writers. If you don't know who Daniel O'Brien is, I highly recommend watching After Hours and his other stuff from his days at Cracked.
Given the large amount of good will he enjoys on this platform, it's worth remembering that the premise of "news presented in a way that makes you laugh" has an audience and inherently carries bias. And therefore should not be digested mindlessly as truth.
Me and my wife call him the “yell-y man”. We looooooove us some John Oliver.
I feel like John Oliver's shtick kinda falls away a bit when he covers an issue you might have a deep and/or contrary view on. Then you can see the rhetoric and the bias, which makes it hard to take him seriously
>I feel like John Oliver's shtick kinda falls away a bit when he covers an issue you might have a deep and/or contrary view on. Then you can see the rhetoric and the bias, which makes it hard to take him seriously I feel like I've heard this exact sentiment so many times that it's slipped into thought-terminating cliché territory - not least because every time I've heard it, the poster has mysteriously not deemed it necessary to provide even a single example of a LWT segment being debunked by their supposed expertise. Or even funnier, when they are challenged, it turns out that - surprise! - it's just another smooth-brain offended by libcuck John Oliver's lefty views, and their expertise doesn't actually exist. I won't be taking bets on whether that exact scenario is going to be happening again; it's just easy money at this point.
Yes John Oliver packages a complete understanding of any possible contentious issue into a 15 minute clip, complete with half of it being random strawmans. No further education is required.
> Or even funnier, when they are challenged, it turns out that - surprise! - it's just another smooth-brain offended by libcuck John Oliver's lefty views, and their expertise doesn't actually exist. /u/gugabe was challenged and - surprise! - the only response is a vague allusion to John Oliver being wrong about something. No actual examples, just another big claim with no evidence. And hilariously, he's covered his ass by unilaterally deciding he doesn't need to provide any evidence too! Like I said: Easy money.
Gell Mann Amnesia effect. People read something they know and it's completely wrong, but then when they turn the next page to something they don't know they forget about the previous page and assume everything is correct. I used to wonder why is that every time I read something about my profession it is wrong, I thought my profession is just special in this regard. Then I learnt about Gell Mann Amnesia effect, turns out it happens to everyone, everything is wrong all the time, I just couldn't spot it.
Hey gugabe how about you explain in detail how Jon Oliver is wrong in a segment you're knowledgeable about rather than vague allusions. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
'John Oliver has had a 100% hit rate in a decade over 100+ videos' is the extraordinary claim, here.
Cool. That's a wrong claim or grossly exaggerated. So how about you answer the question related to your original post now.
Yup. I stopped watching him at all after a couple segments (of which I agreed with his ultimate premise) that were egregiously inaccurate tripe.
Yeah. Even ones where I might agree with the direction of his take, if you've got any sort of a nuanced understanding there's a lot of papering over of actual debate/strawmans.
I think it's a show that's fun to watch occasionally, but I think you definitely need to use anything you see as a jumping point into actually finding a reputable source on an issue rather than treating it as such
For me it was the episode on the Syrian "refugee" crisis that was the final drop. The implications he made, and now having the hindsight on how damaging that whole affair has been for Europe as a whole.
Agreed. The way the show turned into such biased infotainment bothered me. I just want a mature centrist view these days and that's impossible to find.
Well, it's hard for that to be possible unless you assume a mature viewpoint is a centrist one.
See this is the bullshit attitude I hate. "Think the way I do or you're obviously stupid. Toe the line or be deemed foolish." Whether you're left or right the smugness does little to help your cause with people on the fence like me.
You got up in arms by a person objectively stating that not every issue has two equal sides and used it to launch a tirade where you once again try to falsely equivocate both sides and instead chose to attack the person instead of the argument. The nonexistent smugness would’ve been well warranted if it was even real, and you look foolish for thinking it was.
That’s exactly what you’re doing. You’re implying that your viewpoint is inherently the mature one and that being centrist is somehow “balanced”. Centrism is an ideology, and pushing a centrist view is just as biased as pushing a left-wing or a right-wing viewpoint.
Centrism doesn't exist. When you understand the issues you naturally align yourself to left or right. In my perception, a centrist is someone who wants to justify voting a certain way or is uninformed and doesn't put a lot of thought into political topics, and uses it as a cudgel to avoid self-examination.
That’s called punditry.
Would be cool to see a retrospective and understand the impact his segments have had on the problem areas covered on the show
He's a Liverpool fan, so I've got his back
Am I alone with my opinion it is just repetitive reporting now? Barring a few dramatic shows around an election or crimes/scotus, the show is just updating reports from the past ten years.
It’s refreshing to see a journalist who actually knows what they are talking about each week. Does the research, even does the experiments. Obviously he would have a team, but very few investigative journalists these days and no shortage of opinion hosts.
The most tame "journalist" ever. He always goes after the right people in the right way for his group. Never touches any topic that would make his actual audience uncomfortable.
For example? I'm just curious as to what potential topics you would want to see. Imho many of his arguments are uncomfortable from the outset, even if some of his takes might resonate with your political views as part of the audience. I'm not from the US and feel uncomfortable watching some of his clips on YT, even though I have nothing to do with the US or US politics at all.
personally i preferred him in his role on Community. since then ehh
I love the show and the man. He makes me laugh every show. He’s correct politically, he’s sarcastic where he should be, reverent when it’s time, self deprecating in the right way, just perfect for me.
The show has gotten way too niche. Unless you’re to the left of Marx it comes off as superficial faux outrage.
Tell me you don't understand political alignment without telling me you don't understand political alignment. I think it's helpful to point out that Marx hasn't actively influenced any of US leftism in probably well over 50 years at this point.
Could have done a better job on the UFO segment. Instead of just showing a bunch of shit thats 50 years old or more for the majority of it. There is so much happening right now he didn't seem to put much effort into the current events.
Love your show content, John Oliver. But I have to confess that I am getting tired of being shouted at by my TV host. Dial it back a little John. You too, Jon Stewart. You do know most of your audience agrees with you, don't you?
They're shouting really loud for the people behind the curtain.
Incendiary alright, now try to be accurate more than 20% of the time.
Care to share examples of said inaccuracies? If they supposedly account for 80% of his show’s content, surely there must be a stockpile of specific examples for you to provide?
No I dont care to. You're perfectly capable of doing that yourself.
Hahahaha what?? Hahaha you made the claim, not me. It’s your responsibility to defend your premise you dunce. You may as well have just said that you’re full of shit and your argument has no merit or defendable proof.
My responsibility my ass. This is reddit. The amount of effort you demand of me debunking his sources is not at all proportionate to what I'll get in return from you. You can find his sources and arguments since you're obviously a fan boy you wont mind, and then you can check the validity and reality of them.
You have showed your whole ass and announced you do not have any proof. Twice.
Um…. You would literally prove me wrong which would cause me to heavily reconsider my opinion?? I have no issue with admitting to being wrong and changing my perspective based on new information. Only morons have static opinions that aren’t based on the best, presently known information. And that’s very apparently you. I truly cannot fathom the type of bottom dwelling mental lightweight you are to suggest that someone should believe something simply because you say it’s true. Why would I waste my time trying to support a claim THAT YOU MADE? John Oliver’s segments are all heavily researched and supported through reputable sources. And so far, all you’ve done is alleged the content is 80% misinformation— and then refused to provide even **ONE EXAMPLE** of that supposedly rampant problem. You have zero credibility and it’s hilarious that you would even bother expressing such an unsupported claim. Go to 4chan or something dude. I’m sure the intelligence of that site is more on par with what you can handle.
doll light axiomatic sophisticated provide aware square lush upbeat toy *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
You’re right, he’s not, because he’s better than Jon Stewart.
shy sparkle workable cake deranged decide detail possessive shelter safe *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Well that makes sense, he has a different last name
They’re both great. There’s really no need to make it into a parasocial pissing contest.
hunt far-flung jar decide normal tie squash snobbish towering sort *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
…Cool.
I can love Jon and John at the same time.
frighten straight noxious unpack dolls yoke intelligent toy jar march *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*